The option does not concern me since it is so unusual for me to purchase a quantity of tires in the double digits, much alone the single digits.
My opinions haven't changed much over the years; I'll always put new tires on the drive axle (provided they aren't ditchfinders), and I'd never want a 4WD to have varying tyre depths anyhow, so it doesn't matter to me where I place the new ones on the other wheels.
This isn't some driving god self-delusional thing, but, the majority of us who know our cars and understand how to operate them have the greatest ability to make such decisions for ourselves. I know that the official position is new to the rear, but as with everything else these days, a single size has to fit all, and it's perpetually centered on those who haven't a clue (which is one of the numerous reasons why our businesses, mine included, have gone around the U bend).
In real-world situations, most FWD automobiles have a propensity to plough straight on, also known as understeering. I don't know about you guys, but I'm a lot happier attempting to correct an overturn than I am realizing the front wheels are no longer doing anything, which is a situation that is very tough to remedy in time.
There isn't a single person in the world who bats an eye when a vehicle with staggered wheels requires a new set of tires; does this mean they are immune to grip issues?
What I don't understand is why so many people choose cars with hugely wide tyres, which requires weight along with decent tread to shift a great deal of water, nonetheless so many people will run their tyres down to just depth...the number of smaller luxury cars (not heavy enough?) such as lower/middle range RWD German marques often fitted with ridiculously wide elastic bands i've seen ceased up in excessive rainfall stuffed down the motorway armco throughout the years have to maneuver into the many many